GeoJournal 47: 487–496, 1999.

© 1999 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands.

Party organisation and democracy

Florence Faucher
Department of Politics, Stirling University, Stirling FK9 4LA, Scotland, U.K.
(E-mail: florence.faucher@stir.ac.uk)

Received 6 October 1998; accepted in revised form 14 May 1999

Key words: cultural theory, green parties, party organisation, political culture, political opportunity structure

Abstract
The environment is the issue most closely identified with the Green movement. However, a commitment to the rejuvenation
of political practices has been equally important in the development of their partisan organisations. Green party members
share the conviction that democracy is the best way to attain a sustainable society. They aspire to a more participatory
politics and have translated their ideals of equality and individual fulfilment into alternative party structures. Many of
their practices demonstrate that they share values and attitudes which inspire their behaviours and intra-party regulations.
However, Green parties are also influenced by the national structure of political opportunities. The practical arrangements
French and British Greens have developed reflect their relative integration within the political system as well as the influence
of national political culture on conceptions of equality and participation.

Greens have gained prominence on the European political If ecological issues have been one of their characteris-
scene since the creation of the first party organisation in tics, their commitment to a rejuvenation of political practices
1973 in Britain and the election of representatives to the and to increased participation has been equally important in
German Parliament ten years later. They now sit in 11 of the formation and development of their partisan organisa-
the 15 national Parliaments and some of them have entered tions (Poguntke, 1987; Kitschelt, 1989). They are committed
electoral coalitions. Green ministers have been appointed in to alternative politics as much as to a sustainable society.
four countries. The public perceives them as the members They are critical of traditional parties which do not fulfil
of a distinct political family and assumes they share politi- the demands of citizens and only offer limited occasions of
cal values and organisational characteristics. Consistent with participation in the elaboration of policies. Although they
this view is the claim made by Green parties themselves do not reject parties per se, they refuse to be assimilated
that they belong to an international movement of ecological within the present system. They pledge to create a new way
awareness and mobilisation. A Green group was formed in of doing politics. They combine a rejection of hierarchies
the European Parliament as early as 1984 and a Federation and bureaucracies with a mistrust of professional politicians.
of European Green parties was founded in 1993. They have faith in human nature and are convinced that the
Since the late 1980s, the environment has become a direct involvement of people will ensure that the best de-
salient issue on the European political agenda and many cisions are taken. Thus, they aspire to a more participatory
groups claim they want to promote ecological policies. Not politics through which individuals could fulfil their personal-
all of them, however, agree on the route to an ecological ities. Their ideals of equality and participation have inspired
society. It is therefore important to distinguish Green par- the creation of alternative party structures.
ties, which promote new politics issues, from organisations These claims partake in a unified vision of Greenness,
which are prepared to accept authoritarian measures to pro- perceived as transcending institutional and cultural differ-
tect the environment.1 While the parties which belong to the ences. But are the Greens identical throughout Europe?
European Federation share egalitarian values, other groups Although it is in many ways exceptional, the German party
demand that more regulations and controls be imposed on has often been taken as the archetype of all Green parties.
human actions. It is by looking at their partisan subcultures One of the first to be electorally successful, it has attracted
that we can best understand the originality of the Greens. most of the attention. The electoral and party systems, the
1 Although all the organisations which place the environment high on their
structure of political cleavages, the nature of political insti-
tutions, the openness of the state to discussion with interest
agenda tend to be all labelled ‘green’, they present ideological and organi-
sational differences. Andrew Dobson has suggested to distinguish ‘Greens’ groups, contribute to the determination of the strength and
from environmentalists whom he calls ‘greens’ with a small g (Dobson, the prospects of any party. The practical arrangements the
1990). Both Les Verts and the Green Party belong to the former category. Greens have come up with have also been affected. In or-
der to assess the impact of the opportunity structure (Kriesi
488

et al., 1995) and of the national political culture,2 it is nec- description’6 of the organisational choices made by two
essary to compare parties immersed in different political parties reveals their embeddedness within a specific insti-
environments. This should also allow us to understand the tutional and cultural political environment. Comparative
influence exerted by a theoretical or universal ‘Greenness’ studies help by questioning what is taken for granted as one
on Green activism and to contrast it with traits linked to remains blind to the familiar patterns underlying our cul-
national institutions and political culture. turally embedded behaviours. The comparison points at the
Members of Les Verts and of the British Green Party3 origins of attitudes and conducts, queries the justifications
present similar socio-demographic characteristics (Faucher, given to legitimate them. Beyond statutes and official dec-
1999, 79). Both parties are confronted with a hostile politi- larations, values are created, shared and confirmed through
cal environment: majoritarian electoral rules make access to the routine interactions of activists and the party rituals. Af-
parliament a difficult challenge and policy-making process ter an analysis of the values and attitudes shared by Green
has been relatively closed to their influence so that the ef- parties, this article will focus on how and why both parties
ficiency of a parliamentary strategy has sometimes been have adapted to their particular environments.
questioned (Sainteny, 1994). Moreover, these two parties
have, in the past, been contrasted with Die Grünen and
described as ‘pure ecology parties’ showing little interest A common Green culture
for alternative politics (Müller-Rommel, 1985). However,
Les Verts and the Green Party also exhibit preoccupations Green parties share a number of characteristics which can be
for intra-party democracy and non-conventional forms of explained by their cultural bias. These traits are manifest in
participation. As their European sister parties, they have the desire to create alternative party organisations based on
imagined new ways of decision making, experimented in- equality, participation and inclusion.
novative structures. They share with them an aspiration to
equality, participative ideals, a myth of nature and a distrust Cultural theory: the egalitarian culture of the Greens
for institutionalised powers.
Although the policies and issues put forward by these Cultural theory tells us about the articulation between so-
two parties are comparable, differences are manifest in their ciability and cultural bias. It purports that two dimensions
apprehension of nature – the romantic outlook of the British organise human relations. The first refers to interactions be-
contrasting with the often anthropocentrist perspective ac- tween individuals within a group, the influence they have on
knowledged by the French – the emphasis on lifestyles each other and the importance they give to these relation-
transformation (Faucher, 1998) or on political campaigning, ships. The second, called grid, denotes the degree to which
ways of working and the aspiration to the creation of a Green an individual’s life is subject to determination by others
community here and now (Faucher, 1999). While it is pos- (Thompson et al., 1990, p. 5). The combination of these two
sible to contrast the attitudes of French and British Greens dimensions gives a matrix with four quadrants representing
in a variety of areas, I will focus here on their views on four different possible ways of life. Each of these forms
participative democracy and on the equal rights of all party of sociability is associated with a corresponding worldview
members.4 which justifies it as much as it is largely determined by
If the similarities between Green parties can be explained it. The latter cannot be in contradiction with the former.
by a common cultural bias (Douglas and Wildavsky, 1983), These cultures are in conflict with each other because the
how can we account for the differences? Political oppor- choice of one lifestyle implies the rejection of the others.
tunity structures influence the integration of each party in Moreover, argue cultural theorists, they are interdependent
their national political system, thus determining their rela- because their opposition contributes to their definition of
tive marginality and their ability to preserve an autonomous what they are, how the world is and how to behave in that
identity. Culture is one dimension of the political opportu- world.
nities structure. Its effects are difficult to assess.5 A ‘thick When both grid and group are low, individuals encounter
very few restrictions on their actions. All have equal free-
2 The national political culture comprises the values and the representations
dom to organise their lives as they want apart from minimal
related to political objects and conflicts which are shared by the people
of a national community. These cognitive and evaluative attitudes allow regulation. Individualists tend to consider that problems are
individuals to interpret, understand and react to the world in which they live linked to excessive control and the existence of special treat-
(Schemeil, 1985). ment for certain groups. They trust nature to be capable of
3 The British Green Party is technically the Green Party of England, Wales
adapting to any transformation humans may bring.
and Northern Ireland since the Scottish Green Party took its independence
in 1990. They have however maintained close collaboration. If the number of regulations and constraints on individ-
4 This article draws from participant observation and interviews with mem- ual behaviour increases but the integration within a group
bers of Les Verts and the British Green Party over a period of five years. A remains weak, the cultural bias is characterised by fatalism.
more detailed analysis of the similarities and differences between the two They are distrustful of their fellow human beings. Nature,
parties can be found in Faucher, 1997.
5 The concept of political opportunity structure remains problematic as for fatalists, is capricious and all that can be done is coping
it tries to include elements of the environment of various nature and with random events.
underestimates the influence of social and cultural contexts (Rootes, 1997). 6 Geertz calls a ‘thick description’ the interpretive theory of culture (Geertz,
1993).
 489

In the high grid-high group quadrant, social relations (Inglehart, 1990). They refuse to let politicians take deci-
concur with a culture which is hierarchical. Individuals be- sions for them. They claim they aspire to transform politics
lieve that some people are more qualified than others whom in a more participative way, to empower citizens. Activists
they should therefore lead. According to them, problems explain that they believe that everyone should take respon-
arise because too many people try to be involved in decision- sibility for one’s actions and should therefore get more
making while finding solutions should be left to experts. thoroughly involved in one’s community. They condemn the
They believe that nature is robust, but only within limits, disempowerment of ordinary citizens by traditional political
hence the need for regulations and planning. parties. They criticise the institutionalised actors who protect
The last quadrant (high group and low grid) comprises their established positions and powers.
individuals who value human relations and fulfil themselves ‘People are important, people struggling against other
in a group. They are responsible for the group but, at the people telling them what to do, people making their own
same time, respect and value the autonomy and indepen- decisions,’ claims a British Green Party activist. Another ar-
dence of each member. They are reluctant to accept reg- gues that citizens, if asked, would inevitably choose the right
ulations which can restrain their independent action. They policies. In France as well as in Britain, many party members
prefer small communities and voluntary co-operation. Since are convinced that these decisions and orientations would
they believe all members to be equals, they consider they undoubtedly be Green. Willing to take responsibility for
should have a say on their life. Egalitarians refuse rules their actions and aware of their competence, the Greens dis-
which would introduce relations of domination and subor- pute their exclusion from the day-to-day running of politics
dination. They are suspicious of rituals and distrustful of and resent that their influence is restricted to the periodi-
leadership. Associated with this cultural bias is a myth of cal election of Members of Parliament. According to them,
nature as fragile and a belief that pollution can be lethal this largely explains the mistrust in politicians expressed by
(Douglas, 1996, p. 87). Problems are assumed to be caused an increasing number of citizens (Klingemann and Fuchs,
by the corruption of human nature by dominant institutions 1995). They are convinced that people know best what is
and practices. They blame the ‘system’7 and think cor- good for them and should therefore be able to take part in the
rupting influences come from outwith the group. They are decisions that have an impact on their lives. ‘I’m responsible
therefore wary of treachery or pollution. for my bit,’ comments an activist, ‘I think handing one’s
The Greens value equality and solidarity, they aspire to responsibility over is one of the very big problems: people
decision-making by consensus and are reluctant to impose do not do their bit because they think somebody else will
any decision or restrictive measure on human actions within pick up the pieces’.
their group or in the world. They feel individuals ought to Ecology and democracy are closely linked, explain the
be responsible for the consequences of their actions and Greens: ‘not only is ecology political but politics and democ-
add that they certainly would if they weren’t alienated and racy are intrinsically ecological’ (Lipietz, 1993, p. 24). They
disempowered by our current economic and political sys- claim that the participation of people in decision-making
tem. These characteristics have led Mary Douglas, amongst processes is a prerequisite for the establishment of a truly
others, to analyse the Greens as representatives of the egal- sustainable society. Some activists admit that democracy
itarian culture (Douglas, 1996, p. 181). She shows that they may not be the quickest route towards a sustainable soci-
present the characteristics of the border: not only are they ety, but they argue that it is undoubtedly the only way to
dissenters but they also want to differentiate themselves from guarantee that such a society will last. ‘The appeal to collec-
all others (Douglas and Wildavsky, 1983). Cultural theory tive and individual responsibility is indistinguishable from
can thus help us to connect the Green perception of nature the perfection of democracy. If one wants citizens to feel
to their ideal of a sustainable society and what is seen as a responsible, one must accept that they also take part in the
truly Green way of being active in politics. It also explains decision-making processes which affect them’.8 They be-
similarities between the Greens’ preferred ways of organis- lieve that ‘society only evolves when it accepts changes’
ing, their desire to be ‘purer’ and to promote equality and (Waechter, 1990, p. 239) and that an authoritarian gov-
participation. ernment would only obtain a superficial transformation of
behaviours: ‘people would carry on covertly with their un-
Promoting political participation for all green lifestyles and would look for every possible way to
avoid governmental constraints and regulations’.9
Members of Les Verts and the Green Party are disproportion- Members of Les Verts and of the British Green Party
ately drawn from the new middle class fractions of European have faith in human perfectibility and believe that people
societies. They show high levels of political awareness and will eventually become Green and will adopt appropriate
concern (Roche and Benhamias, 1991; Rüdig et al., 1991). lifestyles. ‘If people are to participate, you have to find ways
They maintain that politics permeates every human action. of encouraging them to participate that are not just putting a
They feel they could, and should, contribute more to the cross on a box every four years,’ remarks an English activist.
political decision process and resent the representative sys- On either side of the Channel, Greens are adamant that it is
tem which only allows them to participate at election times
8 Motion to the annual general meeting of Provence-Alpes-Méditerranée
7 The corruption of the system is the leitmotiv of David Icke’s book (Icke, region, October 1992.
1990). Cf. Faucher (1997, p. 283). 9 Interview with Sara Parkin, January 1993.
490

vital to create more opportunities for continuous participa- Preventing the emergence of an elite
tion. Grassroots democracy is thus a means to overcome the
imperfections of the representative system. It is seen as a Greens show a deep hatred for anything resembling hierar-
guarantee of efficiency and this explains the efforts of the chy and for decisions imposed from the top (Faucher, 1999,
Greens to promote participation within their own structures. p. 217). Many mention this defiance as one of the moti-
There is no unique model of a Green democracy, although vations for joining the party. ‘Everybody has got a talent,’
most activists express visions of a Green society which is a explains one British Green, ‘some people can talk won-
small, self-reliant community, where decisions are taken by derfully well about organic potatoes, we do not only need
face-to-face assemblies.10 people who can talk about monetary economics!’ Like many
In Britain and France, Greens see consistency between others, she is convinced that elites and Greenness are simply
attitudes and conducts as a moral duty. It is, for most of contradictory: ‘I’m anti leader to the point of being up-
them, a corollary of a more general principle of consistency side-down anti-leaders’. She has faith in the possibility of
between means and ends. ‘I have always believed you cannot constructing a party which would not have a leader. ‘Un-
separate means and ends,’ argues one: ‘It’s not just that the like other parties, we are not little soldiers obeying orders’,
means should be consistent with the ends, whether you like it comments one French. These members strive to prevent the
or not, the means prefigure the ends: if you go about things in emergence of any internal hierarchy and fear that despite
an authoritarian way, the end will be authoritarian. For that their efforts a leader might rise from the rank and files.13
reason, if we believe in direct democracy, in libertarian and Some of them spend a great deal of their energy suspecting
empowering structures, then we have to create the organisa- their fellow party members of such dangerous ambitions.
tion that is to take us there.’ According to most of them, a At the beginning of the 1990s, many British activists felt
good decision-making process guarantees a good outcome. concerned and worried by the charisma of Sara Parkin and
‘Our democracy and our proposals for democratic govern- her appeal to the media. International co-ordinator, then
ment are to do with participative politics, not representative Speaker, she was elected Chair of the newly created ex-
politics [which] is not empowering [and] engenders apathy ecutive in October 1991. As they had suspected Jonathan
and irresponsibility,’ comments with pride a British activist. Porritt14 of political ambitions, they accused her of mega-
The majority of Green party members believe that intra- lomania and systematically opposed all her initiatives. She
party democracy will lead to the elaboration of policies eventually withdrew from party activism in September 1992.
closer to the people. Their desire to participate does not seem However, other party members have come to terms with
to be compatible with the passive acceptation of decisions the necessity to institutionalise spontaneity, to ‘legiferate
they would not have personally contributed to take. Many on rulessness’15 so that these ideals of equality and par-
Greens have accepted to join a political party under the strict ticipative democracy can be preserved and materialised.
condition that their organisation ‘gives citizens a say, sets up Collective leadership is one of the solutions French and
a participative democracy’ and abides by strict moral stan- British Greens have found. To the question ‘How is it possi-
dards. ‘We need to facilitate power down rather than taking ble to create a movement which has more influence?’ French
all the power on to ourselves,’ they explain, wary of the risk activists answer: ‘By modifying our internal structure in or-
of reproducing the same error as traditional parties. They der to establish a real and less formal democracy; by giving
highlight the moral duty to make sure that political action the national executive a more collective orientation, by open-
does not ‘corrupt the soul or waters down the originality of ing working groups to social and cultural movements’.16 An
the movement’.11 Failure to stand up to the high ideals of English Green who has campaigned against the centralisa-
democracy would lead the Green movement to ‘lose its soul tion of the party structures admits: ‘in a large organisation,
and identity’.12 you can never have a total participative democracy and you
Activists have often been reluctant to accept the in- start to have representative democracy but it’s always better
stitutionalisation of their movement because they favour to have a complete people making decisions by discussing
spontaneity. The predecessor of the British Green Party, Peo- various points of view: one person will never have all these
ple, did not adopt a constitution before 1975 and relied for a different points of view.’ A French concurs: ‘you always
long time on informal decision-making processes. The con- have to question what you are doing and never take a de-
stitutions of local or regional organisations are often minimal cision alone. You always should do things democratically,
if not altogether non existent. Les Verts only drafted standard after consultation with all the other people involved’.
constitutions for their regional level in the mid 1990s. At the In order to oppose the rise of potential leaders, Green
local level, many British Greens are proud of the absence of parties regulate equality. They also profess their faith in col-
formal regulations which would impose constraints. Their legial decision-making because it empowers all participants
reluctance is manifest in their choice of a party structure. 13 Such debates and preoccupations have been common to other green
‘There’s no point for me being in the organisation unless it’s parties (Poguntke, 1994; Kitschelt, 1989).
one that’s not like the others,’ insists a member of the Green 14 The author of Seeing Green in 1984, former speaker for the party and
Party. former President of Friends of the Earth, Jonathan Pottitt is one of the most
famous advocates of Green politics in the UK.
10 Visions of a green society are explored in Dobson A., Lucardie P., 1993. 15 Cf. Turner on the ‘communitas’ phenomenon (Turner, 1990).
11 ‘Garder le Cap’, Tribune des Verts, 22, 1992. 16 ‘Quelles seront les couleurs de l’automne?’, Tribune des Verts 27, 27,
12 ‘La démocratie en pratique’, Tribune des Verts, 23, 1992. 1993.
 491

rather than bestow power on any individual. Members of Les the result of a draw, alternating male and female candidates
Verts’ Collège Exécutif (CE) and of the Green Party Execu- who would commit themselves to a rotation system every
tive Committee (GPEx) take decisions together. In 1994, Les other CNIR meeting’.20 Drawing lots would guarantee that
Verts confirmed their commitment to a ‘collegiate’ form of all members have an equal chance of getting selected to a
leadership. Dominique Voynet was Principal Speaker for Les committee. However, this system is alien to the political tra-
Verts between 1992 and 1997.17 Interviewed in 1994 when dition of the West. Lot, which was used in Ancient Greece,
she was campaigning to be selected as the Green presidential was abandoned in the 18th century in favour of a repre-
candidate, she praised the collegial rule as she recognised sentative system which preserves, through the election, the
the somehow illegitimate quality of her de facto leadership aristocratic character of the selection process (Manin, 1995).
of the party: ‘At my age, I should be learning but this move-
ment lacks experience and people who are 40-ish or 50-ish Practicing participative democracy
are singularly absent. Moreover my youth is balanced by the
fact that I am very well seconded by people with whom I Convinced that grassroots participation is the key to a bet-
do not necessarily agree but whose advises are always very ter party and ultimately to a sustainable society, the Greens
helpful’. Moreover, leaders of Les Verts are careful never to promote new ways of practising politics. They advocate
distinguish too clearly ‘I’ and ‘we’, thus underlying the col- continuous political involvement. The constitutions of Les
lective dimension of the leadership and strengthening their Verts and the Green Party have been written to create the
own position.18 conditions for the direct participation of all members in
The designation of party officials is one of the most dif- decision-making processes. Not only do members elect and
ficult and complex exercises for the Greens. The anti-leader control the executive but they can also directly contribute
culture runs counter to the need to select a small number to the elaboration of policies and strategies. The annual
of executive committee members and speakers to convey party conference21 is the institution in which the Green com-
the Green message to the public. While the direct election mitment to such a principle is demonstrated and enacted:
of individuals gives them legitimacy, it is often feared that motions submitted by members are discussed and decisions
such a procedure may encourage these individuals to over- taken.
estimate their powers. Fiercely opposed to the ‘monarchic Although some preparatory work is often made in the
tendencies’ of the Vth Republic, Les Verts oppose the direct specialised working groups who draft motions, neither party
election of the executive by the entire membership. The dele- leaves the process to a committee. The decisive phase re-
gates of the CNIR19 elect members of the CE who need more mains the discussion of the text by a large body of members.
than 60% of the votes to be elected. Although it has been In France, both the Assemblée Générale (AG) and the
suggested to elect speakers in a wider constituency, such CNIR contribute to the process, but in Britain, this role is
propositions have been rejected, along with those pleading solely played by the conference whose decisions form the
for the election of a general secretary who, like the Presi- Manifesto for a Sustainable Society (MfSS).
dent of the Council of the 4th Republic, would then choose Getting as many people involved as possible is ‘not only
his team and have it ratified by the CNIR. Until 1992, the democratic but produces the best policies’, claim the au-
British Greens followed a similar line: the committees of thors of a booklet published by the Green Party for its
their Party Council were staffed with representatives elected new members.22 Not only are conference delegates asked
by the regions. Some more were then co-opted. In this to formally approve a text by a vote, but all members are
large decision-making body, votes were rarely organised and expected to play an active part in the elaboration of the poli-
decisions were mostly taken by consensus within the vari- cies, contributing personally to the background and detailed
ous specialised subcommittees. Three annually elected and discussions of the various alternatives. Any fee-paying Vert
rotating co-chairs co-ordinated the work. can stand up and speak at French Assemblées Générales and
Sceptical about representative democracy, the Greens all Green Party members have the opportunity to participate
underline the desirability of a close identity between the in the debates organised at the bi-annual conference. The
elected and their electorate. As a consequence they favour condition is to raise one’s hand or express such an intention
some form of proportional representation. A system of draw to the Vice-president of the session (in France) or a member
would probably be the closest to the Greens’ ideals of equal of the Standing Orders Committee (in Britain). Time per-
participation. Indeed, some activists have suggested such mitting (there are often more volunteers than the timetable
a system of designation. It would remove the bitterness of the meeting allows), the party activist can then address
of competition and campaigning and would be consistent his/her fellow members from the rostrum.
with their faith in the ability of all party members: ‘a list Most Greens are aware of the limitations of majoritarian
which, to cut short any suspicion of ambition, would be decisions because they have a first hand experience of be-
ing in the minority. They may be convinced they are right,
17 She was appointed Minister for the Environment of the socialist govern-
they are nevertheless ignored. They want to believe that the
ment in June 1997.
18 Villaba B. “La conversion des Verts. La professionnalisation de la 20 ‘En vert-e et pour tous’, Chambéry general meeting, 1992.
‘Politique autrement’ ”, ECPR Joint Sessions, Warwick, 1998. 21 Until the early 1990s, the Green Party’s Annual General Meeting and
19 The Conseil National Inter-régional is the ‘Parliament’ of the party. It Les Verts’ Assemblée Générale were open to all party members physically
gathers four times a year. present or represented by a proxy vote.
22 Making Policy. A Handbook for Green Party Members, 2, 1993.
492

triumph of the good solution is both possible and inevitable does not imply the constitution of groups and preserves the
in a real democracy. Therefore they have sought to secure individual dimension of the election. This is all the more
decisions by demanding large qualified majorities or consen- important for the Greens as they contest the over-reliance
sus. They also often stress that abstentions are not signs of on party labels in British elections and party discipline in
agreement and count such votes with the opposition. Their elected councils. In 1993, a Green Party candidate to the
experience has led them to think of ways to attempt to take local elections explained how he would behave if elected:
all possible opinions into account. A true majority implies, ‘I’ve got my own political opinion but I’m willing to facil-
according to them, a majority against both the votes against itate people if what they’re thinking is similar to what I’m
and the abstentions. They have also created a category of doing, I’m not going just to say: right this is the party line,
‘refuse to take part in the vote’. Yet they may paradoxically I’m here for the party machinery’. British parties have no
appear as great enthusiasts of voting procedures (they some- equivalent to the French party fractions and there is no tradi-
times vote on whether or not a vote should be taken on an tion of a proportional list system. Like most of their political
item), they regularly express their reservations about the vote opponents, the British Greens insist on the importance of the
as a way to take decisions and have endeavoured to imagine candidate’s personality.25 Since 1991, the nine members of
fair voting systems. the GPEx are elected by a postal vote of all members. The
first-past-the-post system was used in 1991 but it offended
too many Green convictions. It was thus abandoned and the
Different responses in different political environments single transferable vote was reintroduced in 1992.26
Most European Green parties have sought to prevent the
Many of the organisational traits of Les Verts and the British emergence of an elite by imposing rotation, short terms
Green Party are characteristics of the culture of the ‘border’ and anti-multiple office holding rules. They have done so
(Douglas and Wildavsky, 1983). However, these parties are according to the institutional framework within which they
not isolated but embedded in an institutional environment. evolve. In France, Les Verts have experienced rotation.27 In
The political opportunities and constraints have affected the Britain, elections have been so far held in single member
electoral success and their recognition as relevant political constituencies where no rotation is possible. The question
partners. While the institutional framework23 can explain was therefore never properly raised in the Green Party. In
why the Greens have preferred different procedures, their both France and Britain, short terms of office were perceived
integration in the party system (or their marginality) is linked as a way to allow members to participate more fully by
to the possibility to remain truly alternative organisations. monitoring the actions undertaken by elected officials made
regularly accountable. The election of the national delegates
Internal electoral rules and electoral strategies to the CNIR often leads to existentialist questions where
the identity of the movement is scrutinised, constructed,
On either side of the Channel, the Greens have chosen elec- debated. The French have recently moved to a two years
toral rules compatible with the national culture in which they mandate to avoid annual internal competition but the main
evolve. Members of the Collège Exécutif are individually item on the conference agenda remains the motion which
elected but regional executives and delegates to the CNIR determines the party’s orientations in terms of electoral al-
are elected by a list system of proportional representation. liances and its future position in the political debate. On
Les Verts cannot imagine any better electoral system than the contrary, British conferences discuss policies rather than
the one which has been discussed by the 3rd Republic, used strategies or general orientation of the movement.28
during the 4th Republic and in 1986 for legislative elections In 1981, many French ecologists disagreed with standing
as well as for European since 1979 and regional elections in the presidential elections. They feared that it could lure
since 1986. The Parti Socialiste (PS) adopted it in 1971 the candidate into believing he/she had a special role in the
for all internal elections because they wanted to keep alive movement. The election of the French President by direct
the various traditions and groups which existed prior to the universal suffrage has led most parties to a presidentialisa-
foundation of the PS. It is often described as a guarantee to tion of their structure. Moreover, this electoral competition
internal pluralism. Thus, in their effort to preserve the diver- has been increasingly perceived as a way to affirm the ex-
sity of their party, Les Verts chose the list system. Although
a few isolated members have suggested alternative propor- single transferable vote system, which works on the basis of the election
of candidates, not lists, and shows strong disproportionality effects in small
tional methods, the French Greens have proved reluctant to
districts’ (Kaiser, 1997, 439).
consider propositions which were alien to their experience. 25 The opposition to party lists (introduced for the European, Welsh and
The British Greens prefer the Anglo-Saxon version of Scottish 1999 elections) is often thus justified.
proportional representation, the single transferable vote, 26 The advantage of this system, claim the British Greens, is that it offers a

which is used in Commonwealth countries.24 This system wider array of choices to electors but the irony is that it implies a plurality of
seats and candidates. However, this is rarely the case and the proportionality
23 Institutions should be understood in a broad sense including formal of the result is dubious.
27 In the European Parliament only as they abandonned the idea in most
and informal rules as well as the complex interactions between contextual
factors (Cf. March, Olsen, 1989). regional councils.
24 ‘With the single exception of New Zealand, wherever a change from 28 All French party congresses debate and vote similar general texts about

plurality system to proportional representation has been implemented [in the party orientations while British parties annual conferences focus on
democracies with a British political heritage], it has been in the form of the policies, sociability and public relations.
 493

istence and the strength of one’s party while the candidate within the party and as a public speaker or elected repre-
is portrayed by the media and perceived by the public as sentative. In one occasion only has the Oxford Green Party
being the leader of the organisation. Les Verts have tried experienced competition between two would-be candidates:
to escape such an evolution as part of their effort to prove there was then a chance of being elected local councillor
wrong the iron law of oligarchy but electoral success and the for the first time.30 Similarly, only a few positions, such as
pressure of the mass media made it extremely difficult. As Principal Speaker or Press Co-ordinator, lead to competition
a consequence, successive speakers have faced the dilemma at the national level. It is likely that electoral success will
of being described as de facto leaders of their movement. increase the competition.
Other important and related issues are the limitation of
time in office and of the number of positions one can hold Moving away from the ‘border’: adapting to the political
at one time. France has a tradition of multiple office hold- system
ing which allows politicians to be at the same time deputy
or senator and member of a local government executive.29 Both Les Verts and the Green Party reformed their party
Les Verts have strongly criticised the situation, describing it constitution in the early 1990s with the intention of being
as a plague on democracy responsible for the lack of trust more efficient and better adapted to the political system in
citizens have in their representatives. It has become a topical which they evolve. In Britain, the annual general meeting
and heated question: should the party allow those who hold was transformed into a conference of delegates. In France,
office (regional, municipal or general councillors, députés or the Assemblée Générale (AG) has been replaced by a As-
MEPs) to be speakers or members of the party committees at semblée Fédérale (AF) which is gathered every other year.
national, regional or local levels? A complex grid has been The AF remains the supreme authority within the party but
created, attributing points to each level of internal or external is organised in two phases. Party members first meet in re-
responsibility, leading the way to disputes on the interpre- gional general meetings and elect delegates to the Federal
tation of the rule. Mirroring the 5th Republic, posts in the Assembly which gathers two weeks later. Its agenda is com-
CNIR and the CE are not compatible. Because Les Verts posed of issues which have not been resolved during the first
remain a small organisation, they only have a small number phase. Between each of them, the party is governed by the
of politicians and electoral success has created a new prob- CNIR.
lem: finding enough qualified people to represent the party. In both countries, party members perceived the reform as
Thus, they have to a certain extent accepted that the same a threat to radicalism and as an attempt to undermine Green
people hold at the same time positions inside and outside ways of doing politics. They feared that the acceptance of
the party. As most wellknown figures are already holding representative democracy would put an end to hopes of di-
electoral mandates (in regional councils or in the National rect participation by rank-and-file members. ‘The ordinary
Assembly), Les Verts decided to ask Daniel Cohn-Bendit, activist will not be able to go to the annual general meeting
an incumbent Member of the European Parliament elected and will only be able to speak out in the regions’ gloomily
in 1994 for the German Grünen but also famous for his role commented a French activist. ‘The proposed reform marks
in the 1968 student rebellion, to lead the 1999 European list. the triumph of the notables. But there is worse: in the debate
Aware of the potential problem of scarcity of talented and between representative and participative democracy, this
committed members, Les Verts have not created rules limit- system clearly admits the end of the participative democracy
ing the number of consecutive reelections to any position. In which formed the core ideal of the Green project’.31
Britain, the rule raises no discussion, no objection and few Many French Greens resented the idea that Les Verts
comments: the GPEx is incompatible with membership of would look too much like other political parties and would
other national party committees but not with positions in the abandon their commitment to ‘politique autrement’. The
local government. The length of office has been limited to creation of a congress was probably far too radical a move
five consecutive years. However, the Greens have had few away from an alternative organisation. The new system,
positions of power to fill in so far. They have thus been able which is supposed to blend the advantages of both the AG
to concentrate on a carefully worked out process of selection. and the congress, was introduced in 1995. The two-stages
Hustings for the election of all committees are organised at conference is a compromise which allows the French Greens
the annual party conference. An entire afternoon is devoted to cling to their ideal of participative democracy.
to the procedure. As most party members do not go to con- It is probably little surprising that the British Greens
ferences, hustings seem to play little role in the outcome accepted more easily the representative system. Whereas
of the vote. They are, nevertheless, scrupulously organised representative institutions are relatively new in France,32
because they are a crucial stage in any democratic selection they have been a characteristic of the British political sys-
procedures (Norris and Lovenduski, 1995). In sharp con- 30 Founded in 1979, the Oxford Green party has become one of the most
trast with their equivalent in France, they run smoothly and successful local groups with 6 local councillors in 1998. The first was
without excessive passion. Such an appeased process must elected in 1993, a few months after the competition.
31 Pelletier W., ‘La réforme des statuts va tuer les Verts’, Arguments pour
be linked to the absence of many rewarding positions both
une Ecologie sociale, 9, 1994.
29 Since 1995, it is only possible to hold two such positions at the same time 32 The institutions of the Fifth Republic are also characterised by a com-
and the Parliament is currently discussing new legislation prohibiting such bination of two distinct logics: incarnation and representation (Donegani,
practices in the future. Sadoun, 1998).
494

tem for centuries. In 1991, the adoption of the Green 2000 running of most of its meetings. French are suspicious of too
constitutional reform transformed the annual general meet- much insistence on sociability: debates are often confronta-
ing into a conference of delegates elected by local groups. tional and little time is devoted to sociability. Debates run
It was hardly contested and there have been only few at- uninterrupted by tea or coffee breaks and sometimes carry
tempts to revert to a general meeting. The objective of Green on late into the night.
2000 was to make the party more eligible. However, the In the mid-1980s, a group was set up to think about more
new institutions have failed to change the party sub-culture. effective and more democratic ways of conducting debates
Marginalised and isolated, the conference remains a social at conference. Called Other Ways Of Working (OWOW), it
get-together where the values shared by party members are found inspiration in the experiments of the counter-cultural
enacted, the collective identity constructed. Policies are also movements which had been rediscovering the importance
debated: they provide the excuse for the meeting. of emotional intelligence and showed interest in political
The most radical change brought by the 1991 reform of correctness. The introduction of new management methods
the Green Party constitution was the creation of an executive. and the developments of such techniques in social work and
It was mainly inspired by the necessity to identify responsi- academic life probably also played a role.
bilities and can be compared to the traditional Whig model The British Greens demand that participation of all mem-
of ministerial responsibility (Beattie, 1985). Green 2000 bers be equal. Thus they have developed a whole range of
supporters were not looking for a perfect match between small meetings and working group sessions whereby the shi-
party members and their officials and admitted the necessity est members can feel more comfortable. Conference chairs
of a closely monitored but autonomous executive. This was try to bring these people into the debates and make sure that
a break away from the tradition of the Party Council and its no one gets the impression that she/he is anonymous as op-
numerous co-opted committees. The party has abandoned posed to the regular conference goers. The British Greens
its almost all inclusive decisional body for a centralised and have total faith in the abilities of individuals. The conviction
cohesive executive. that all contributions are equally worthy is reflected in the
In the early 1990s, both Les Verts and the Green Party efforts to promote equal participation.
have amended their constitution. To some extent they moved Debates in French AG are often overcrowded by people
away from their radical ideals. They thus adopted more hi- whose main concern is to say something. Moreover, Les
erarchical party structures. They also had to come to terms Verts are happy enough with providing all members with
with the constraints of institutional politics. In France, Les equal opportunity to participate in debates. Although they
Verts had just been promoted as an electoral ally by the admit that not everyone indeed seizes his/her chance and that
French socialist33 and were receiving more media atten- key positions, as well as microphones, are most of the time
tion. In Britain, the opposition between electoralists and dominated by the same devoted activists, they overlook the
decentralists culminated in the Green 2000 campaign led excuse of timidity to provide further help.
by Sara Parkin in 1991–1992. Despite a new constitution Fringe meetings are common in all British party confer-
and a presumably more centralised organisation, practices ences where they are extremely popular. OWOW thought of
have little changed in the Green Party. The same routines substituting to plenary sessions the intimacy of small groups
are performed. The party has largely retained its egalitarian where not only everybody would feel more comfortable to
and participative culture which characterise an organisation speak but also where discussions would be able to go into
of the ‘border’. the details of policies. This was inspired by the pragmatic re-
alisation that all members were not necessarily competent or
Promoting a counter-culture: sociability and consensus interested in all the topics discussed and that formal debates
left out many valuable contributions from shy members. A
Although French and British Greens are equally critical of former member of OWOW34 explains:
the adversarial style of mainstream politics, only the British
have looked for practical alternatives. They resent the adver- ‘Plenaries are adversarial: you vote yes or you vote no.
sary nature of British politics and look for a world devoid of But in workshops, there is a genuine opportunity to be
conflict. They feel that the atmosphere – sometimes heated put to say ‘I don’t like this, I don’t like that’. You can
– of conference debates is ungreen and they have tried to only do that in a small and more intimate group, the
promote a culture of warmth and friendliness. The ceremo- process of consensus building is based on small groups
nial of the tea/coffee break characterises the timetable of all so that people can hear each other’.
Green Party meetings. While the serious and work dimen- Since 1992, only conference delegates are entitled to vote
sion is stressed in most French party meetings, their British in the plenary sessions where final decisions are taken but
equivalents retain an important social aspect. British party these sessions have been shortened to an hour and a half
conferences are regarded as social events, as opportunities per half-day. The rest of the time is allocated to workshops.
for activists to meet fellow party members, to drink and to Workshop facilitators are asked to make sure that each par-
socialise. The British Green Party takes pride in the peaceful ticipant leaves the meeting with the feeling that he/she has
33 Soon after the 1992 regional elections, the PS offered Les Verts to enter
been able to express his/her point of view and has personally
a coalition deal for the forthcoming general elections. The proposition was
contributed to the discussion. The conclusions of the work-
rejected and Les Verts made an alliance with Génération Ecologie in 1993. 34 The group ceased to be active in the late 1980s.
 495

shops are the basis of formal plenary debate leading to a final of partisan organisations. They have experimented with
vote. This procedure saves time as those who desperately ways of promoting grassroots participation, endeavoured
want to speak have the opportunity to express their opinion to prevent the emergence of leaders and created collegiate
or their intimate feelings and are happy enough to have been executives. We have shown that both parties share similar
heard once. views not only about nature and society but also about how
The workshops and plenary sessions organised by the their party should be organised.
British Greens are extraordinary calm to someone used to However, they also exhibit striking differences. Two
Les Verts: activists quietly listen to the orators, avoid chit- main arguments can be put forward to explain these varia-
chatting or moving around the hall. They truly seem to tions. First, although these parties are influenced by what
concentrate on debates, intensely aware of their responsibil- they claim to be an international Green culture and world-
ity in the democratic process. Plenary sessions look like well view, they are also embedded in a specific national political
choreographed ballets, where activists diligently walk up to culture. They adapted to political institutions and traditions.
the microphone to deliver concise and generally relevant in- They invented alternative practices within the limited scope
terventions. On the contrary, when debates are opened in of what is thinkable and what is not in their own culture. The
France, activists rush to the platform to register as speakers. internal organisations of Les Verts and the Green Party, the
Later, when their name is called, they walk casually to the procedures chosen to facilitate participation, adopt decisions
rostrum. They indulge in digressions about their personal and select committee members owe as much to the national
feelings and, because they are more often than not exces- traditions and political culture as they do to a Green ideal
sively long, the chair usually has to ask them repeatedly to of sustainable society. Second, their ability to adapt to the
come to a conclusion. system’s opportunities and constraints or, on the contrary, to
The British Greens praise consensus as the truly Green close themselves to these influences, partly determines their
way of making decisions and have enshrined it in their positions within the political system of their country. But the
constitution.35 ‘Consensus means for me something very process at work here is dialectical because their marginality,
positive, very constructive, very empowering, and very par- or their integration, affects this very adaptability.
ticipative,’ underlines an activist. The process isn’t always The British Green Party has remained marginal. Its im-
successful and, at times, the consensus is forced. In their pact on policy-making is scant, it has been unable to attract
eagerness to find everybody agreeing, chairs occasionally electoral partners and its success at the polls is limited to
conclude when a vote gets an overwhelming majority: ‘it the election of a hundred of local councillors. Many of its
seems we have reached a consensus’. The reluctance to members believe that the party should be the incarnation of a
come up with a split vote may be linked to the aspiration micro sustainable society which example could spread to the
to a community of minds. Workshops aim at producing a wider society. This faith has contributed to the preservation
consensus and participants genuinely try to understand and of a quasi-sectarian egalitarian culture. In a sense, their mar-
accommodate others’ points of view. ginality has allowed them to cultivate alternative lifestyles
‘Consensus is a process of seeking consent. It’s very dif- and practices. In contrast with such an isolation, Les Verts
ferent from compromise [which] is a lose-lose situation: have managed to assert themselves as potential political part-
you and I disagree about something, we agree to compro- ners. Although they have reluctantly accepted the partisan
mise. Both go away angry. If you seek consensus, you’re form, they are committed to political action. They have in-
listening carefully, you’re encouraging the voicing of creasingly accepted to take part in the traditional French
dissent and it’s in that disagreement that you try to find political game and they devote little attention to cultural
what really matters and you listen to that communication change. They have been elected to all levels of government,
at all levels, spiritual, emotional, physical.’ they have signed electoral pacts and have participated in
the socialist led government since 1997. They have become
French Greens highlight that many local groups avoid
more professional, more mainstream. The preservation of a
taking formal votes and gradually proceed to mutually
‘culture of the border’, as Douglas and Wildavsky (1983)
agreed conclusions. But they reluctantly use the word con-
call it, is no longer possible when the party gets involved in
sensus itself. The term is, in the French political context,
political and electoral alliances.
negatively connoted. It is often associated with unanimity
The comparative analysis between the French and the
decisions and, rather than the expression of dissent, evokes
British Greens sheds light on the similarities and differences
the negation of pluralism. This may explain why Les Verts
we can expect to find between parties claiming they are part
never really question the fact that decisions are to be taken
of a world-wide movement. It helps understanding the im-
by a majority vote while Green Party members sometimes
pact of the political opportunity structure on the attitudes of
dream of plenary sessions reaching a consensus.
activists towards party organisation and strategy. It under-
lines the complex interactions between a national political
Conclusion culture and a green egalitarian subculture and thus demon-
strates the importance of the cultural dimension in a study
Like their European sister parties, the French and the British of Green parties. Cultural theory can help us predict how
Greens have explored the possibilities of alternative forms these parties are likely to evolve and to develop hierarchical
or individualist traits.
35 Article 8.6.
496

Appendix Kitschelt H., 1989: The Logics of Party Formation. Ecological politics in
Belgium and Western Germany, Cornell University Press, Ithaca.
Klingemann H.D. & Fuchs D. (eds), 1995: Citizens and the State. Beliefs in
AGD Assemblée Générale Décentralisée Government, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
AF Assemblée Fédérale Kriesi H., Koopmans R., Duyvendak J.W. & Giugni M., 1995: New Social
Movements in Western Europe. A Comparative Analysis, UCL Press,
AG Assemblée Générale London.
CE Collège Executif Lipietz A., 1993: Vert espérance. L’avenir de l’écologie politique, La
Découverte, Paris.
GPEx Green Party Executive Manin B., 1995: Principes du gouvernement représentatif, Calmann-Lévy,
CNIR Conseil National Inter-Régional Paris.
Muller-Rommel F., 1985: The greens in Western Europe: similar but
MfSS Manifesto for a Sustainable Society different. Int. Pol. Sci. Rev., 6 (4): 483–499.
OWOW Other Ways of Working March J. & Olsen J., 1989: Rediscovering Institutions: The Organizational
Basis of Politics, The Free Press, New York.
Norris P. & Lovenduski J., 1995: Political Recruitment. Gender, Race
and Class in the British Parliament, Cambridge University Press,
References Cambridge.
Poguntke T., 1994: Basisdemokratie and Political Realities: The Ger-
Beattie A., 1995: ‘Ministerial Responsibility and the Theory of the British man Green Party, In: Lawson K. (ed.), How Political Parties Work.
State’. In: Rhodes R.A.W. & Dunleavy P. (eds), Prime Minister, Cabinet Perspectives from Within. Praeger, London, pp. 3–22.
and Core Executive. McMillan, London, pp. 158–178. Poguntke T., 1997: ‘New Politics and Party Systems. The Emergence of a
Dobson A., 1990: Green Political Thought, Harper Collins Academic, New Type of Party?’, West European Politics, 10 (1), 76–88.
London. Porritt J., 1984: Seeing Green. The Politics of Ecology Explained, Basil
Dobson A. & Lucardie P., 1993: The Politics of Nature. Exploration in Blackwell Publishers, Oxford.
Green Political Theory, Routledge, London. Roche A. & Benhamias R., 1991. Des Verts de toutes les couleurs, Albin
Donegani J.M. & Sadoun M., 1998: La Vème République. Naissance et Michel, Paris.
mort, Calmann-Lévy, Paris. Roche A., 1992: Raisons et significations de l’émergence de l’écologie
Douglas M., 1996a: Risk and Blame. Essays in Cultural Theory, Routledge, politique en France à la fin des années 1980, Thèse de doctorat EHESS.
London. Rootes C., 1997: Shaping collective action: structure, contingency and
Douglas M., 1996b: Thought Styles. Critical Essays on Good Taste, Sage, knowledge. In: Edmonson R. (ed.), The Political Context of Collective
London. Action, Routledge, London, pp. 81–104.
Douglas M. & Wildavsky A., 1983: Risk and Culture. An Essay on the Rüdig W., Bennie L.G. & Franklin M., 1991: Green Party Members. A
Selection of Technological and Environmental Dangers, University of Profile, Delta Publications, Glasgow.
California Press, Berkeley. Sainteny G., 1994: L’influence du contexte national dans le processus de
Faucher F., 1997: Vertitudes. Comparaison du militantisme vert en France construction d’un nouvel acteur politique: le cas de l’écologisme en
et en Grande-Bretagne, Thèse de doctorat en science politique, Univer- Allemagne et en France. Rev. Int. Pol. Comparée, 1 (3): 469–487.
sité d’Aix-Marseille 3. Schemeil Y., 1985: Les cultures politiques. In: Grawitz M. & Leca J. (eds),
Faucher F., 1998: ‘Manger Vert’, Rev. Française Sci. Pol., 43 (3): 437–457. Traité de science politique. T3 L’action politique, Presses Universitaires
Faucher F., 1999: Les habits verts de la politique, Presses de Sciences Po, de France, Paris, pp. 237–307.
Paris. Thompson M., Ellis R. & Wildavsky A., 1990: Cultural Theory, Westview
Geertz C., 1993: The Interpretation of Cultures, Fontana, London. Press, Oxford.
Icke D., 1990: It doesn’t have to be like this. Green Politics Explained, Turner V., 1990: Le phénomène rituel. Structure et contre-structure, Presses
Green Print, London. Universitaires de France, Paris.
Inglehart R., 1990: Culture Shift in Advanced Societies, Princeton Univer- Waechter A., 1990: Dessine moi une planète, Albin Michel, Paris.
sity Press, New York.
Kaiser A., 1997: ‘Types of democracy. From classical to new insitutional-
ism’. J. Theor. Pol., 419–444.